Islamic law never achieved unity but expressed itself in, at least, four surviving schools. More interestingly, contemporary Muslim communities are still divided among themselves on a number of issues related to their laws. This work describes how problem of legal conflicts have been tackled by Muslim jurists. It is an attempt to examine closely the phenomenon of conflict in Islamic law from the standpoint of usūl-al-fiqh or Islamic legal theory. In fact, much is heard nowadays of the contradiction in the body of Islamic law. Whilst in contrast, little is presented in terms of the methodology of removing this conflict. The present work therefore, attempts to redress this balance. The emphasis of the work will be concerned primarily with tarjīh methodology ; how to give preference to one piece of evidence or argument over the other when they conflict. Nevertheless, considerable concern is given to investigating the background to the conflict of law in the Shari'ah. This study of a neglected area in Islamic legal scholarship will be an important source of reference to students, both practising and theoretical jurists or to anyone who merely wishes to increase his knowledge of legal themes, particularly legal conflict. The very aim of the work is to argue that conflict is a natural and unavoidable consequence of legal study because legal conflict is only conflicting principles and arguments adduced by both the classical and modern jurists to reach what is actually intended by God in the target case. Therefore, conflicts are inevitable in most of the cases in fiqh owing to the variety of principles set out to deal with one piece of legal evidence, let alone with all the pieces of legal evidence in question. Tarjīh is therefore, an important and workable instrument in the re-examination of these conflicts and in arriving at the most accurate principle for establishing the law for as long as this is possible. It is hoped that the discovery of new facts and the increase of knowledge which results from the broadening and deepening of the research will positively contribute to the process of unification of Islamic law.

Sharī'a has never ignored the need of and the function of judge. This institution, as developed in the early age of Islam, aimed to establish the rule of God on earth, to decide and explain the law according to the Islamic Law. It appears that anybody could be appointed as a judge but he was required to adopt certain criteria laid down by the fuqahā' based on the Qur'ān, Sunna. Ijmā and Oiyās. The requirements needed to be a judge in this Islamic approach are discussed widely in this study. This study also attempts to show and demarcate the limits of the power of judges in Sharī'a Courts in Kedah, Malaysia. It also shows how Islam established its system of justice in Malaysia. Some questions or hypotheses are examined, the first concerns whether or not people who lack capabilities should be allowed to be appointed judge. The second concerns whether or not the Islamic judicial system follows the Sharī'a in terms of punishment and procedure. The historical and theoretical settings in every age since the pre-Islamic to the 'Abbasid period are also presented. The situation of judge in Sharī'a Court in Kedah, Malaysia is also emphasised, beginning with the developments of the Sharī'a Court and the powers and duties of a judge according to the Malaysian constitutional system. Finally the subjects which have been discussed in separate chapters are actually related to each other. The whole important discussion is brought together, analysed and a conclusion drawn concerning the various problems raised.

In order to understand Islamic legal theory it is important that we study it in the light of the practice which preceded its formation. By studying the relation between the later theory and the practice during the early period of. Islam we will be able to determine the influences on this. theory in its background and development. The present thesis is an attempt to answer a question about this relation between the legal theory and the-preceding practice in one branch of the legal theory. This branch is the Islamic legal theory of the administration of justice al-Qada. The question posed in the thesis is this: Did the theory of the administration in the second and third centuries A. H. express the natural historical development of the Islamic practice of this institution from the time of its introduction until the end of the Umayyad period (when Islamic institutions began to be analysed and discussed) or, on the other hand did Muslim scholars construct the theory in opposition to the actual practice, thereby avoiding any influence from that practice,